December 2007 - U-Boot

[U-Boot-Users] Can U-boot Autodetect arch/ppc versus arch/powerpc from info in the uImage?
by Darcy Watkins 17 Dec '07

17 Dec '07

Hello, I have looked at some of the u-boot code for booting up a linux kernel. It appears that the determination of whether or not to make use of flattened device tree (fdt) in the boot is a compile time selection. For the ppc4xx family of processors, linux kernels are currently built as arch/ppc but there is work-in-progress to move it to arch/powerpc. Can we determine during runtime from info in the uImage whether the linux kernel was built as arch/ppc or as arch/powerpc and then select the fdt support accordingly? It will soon be possible to build a U-Boot for one or the other (for ppc4xx family). I think I will need to implement a U-Boot that will support both since we currently build as arch/ppc but will need to support upgrades to arch/powerpc base kernels down the road. For this, I think we need the U-Boot to be able to support both but detect which one the uImage was built under. In the image.h file, there appears to only be one selection for powerpc so there will likely be need for some other "magic" to make this work. Has anyone checked into this before, or come up with a workable solution? Regards, Darcy

4 23

[U-Boot-Users] [Fwd: Re: reducing size of u-boot binary]
by vibi 17 Dec '07

17 Dec '07

dear jerry, thanks for your reply.i am using u-boot 1.1.5 .my binary is only 90kb & i still wanted to reduce the size.i thought compiling u-boot is like compiling linux kernel,ie source file for the disabled commands wont get compiled,now i understood that i was wrong. i wanted to reduce size to less than 90kb because of constraints in available flash memory space. i have done it by disabling bootp & rarp by using #define macros i didnt find option for that in /include/cmd_confdefs.h . once again i thank you for your response thanks & regards vibi sreenivasan On Fri, 2007-12-14 at 07:20 -0500, Jerry Van Baren wrote: > vibi wrote: > > hello, > > can any one please tell me how to reduce the size of u-boot.bin. > > i tried by disabling commands in the > > include/config/at91rm9200dk.h,as per the read me document > > even after this when i compile,i was unable to decrease the > > size. > > > > thanks in advance. > > > > regards > > vibi sreenivasan > > How big is your binary, why do you need to reduce its size? I ask > because most of the time this question is the result of a link gone bad > where part of the linked binary lives in low memory space and part lives > in high memory space. As a result, the .bin has a huge amount of filled > (unused) data between the two. > > Best regards, > gvb >

2 1

Re: [U-Boot-Users] POST tests without OCM
by Craig Millen 17 Dec '07

17 Dec '07

Yes I am using the 440EP. I was referring to all the code in cpu/ppc4xx/commproc.c, like this section: #if defined(CONFIG_POST) || defined(CONFIG_LOGBUFFER) void post_word_store (ulong a) { volatile void *save_addr = (volatile void *)(CFG_OCM_DATA_ADDR + CFG_POST_WORD_ADDR); *(volatile ulong *) save_addr = a; } ulong post_word_load (void) { volatile void *save_addr = (volatile void *)(CFG_OCM_DATA_ADDR + CFG_POST_WORD_ADDR); return *(volatile ulong *) save_addr; } There are a few more functions in there that refer to the OCM. What/where is the unused GPT that you are talking about? Thanks Craig -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Roese [mailto:sr@denx.de] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 4:04 PM To: u-boot-users(a)lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Craig Millen Subject: Re: [U-Boot-Users] POST tests without OCM Hi Craig, On Friday 14 December 2007, Craig Millen wrote: > I am trying to incorporate some of the POST tests into my u-boot, but > I do not have any on-chip-memory (OCM). A lot of the code appears to > use OCM for storage of data/testing. > Has anyone achieved this by using the cache or any other means? We are thinking about moving this POST_WORD from OCM to an unused GPT (General Purpose Timer) register. You *are* talking about the 440EP, right? This should be possible here too. Patches are as always welcome. :) Best regards, Stefan ===================================================================== DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office(a)denx.de =====================================================================

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] (no subject)
by Исаев Ислам 16 Dec '07

16 Dec '07

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] gigjig
by Parham Kellett 16 Dec '07

16 Dec '07

dont make hitting on the girls so hard, just show them your cock http://larriega.com/

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] Release mails?
by Dirk Behme 16 Dec '07

16 Dec '07

Not tracking u-boot git repository on a daily basis, I was surprised to read posts discussing u-boot 1.3.1 release on ml. I can remember, some weeks ago, I had to look into git repository to find that u-boot 1.3.0 was released. Now, I scanned u-boot ml archives again and can't find any 1.3.0, 1.3.1-rc1 or 1.3.1 release mail. Did I miss anything? Or, if not, what's about having u-boot release mails e.g. like Linus do? Regards Dirk

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] How to Proceed??
by vishu j 15 Dec '07

15 Dec '07

Hi friends, I am very much interested to develop the bootloader like u-boot , but it is very much specific i.e. 'ARM -> (My bootloader) -> Linux Kernel '. I dont know, How to proceed or even how to start??. I am trying this to upgrade my knowledge. Please,Help me out. Thnking you all, in advance.

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] POST tests without OCM
by Craig Millen 14 Dec '07

14 Dec '07

I am trying to incorporate some of the POST tests into my u-boot, but I do not have any on-chip-memory (OCM). A lot of the code appears to use OCM for storage of data/testing. Has anyone achieved this by using the cache or any other means?

2 1

[U-Boot-Users] Make 800-1000 AUD a WEEK?! Yes.
by job＠seek.com.au 14 Dec '07

14 Dec '07

Dear Sir/Madam! This is very Best Job opportunity Offer! Please read. Do You want to make 900-1000 AUD a week, doing 10% comission? Very easy and fun way to make money, few main facts: 1. 900-1000 AUD a week! 2. 18+ y/o ONLY, you have to be able to check your e-mail 3-4 times a day 3. 1-2 hours of free time Monday-Thursday, preferably in the morning. 4. Daily Pay Out! Successful company, located in UK, representing Sony Products, Hitachi computer hardware has an opportunity for you. Currently seeking for Australian residents. Very great opportunity and very easy to work with. For more info please contact: agency.deport(a)gmail.com ATTENTION : This letter not spam, and the real offer for all comers to work and requiring in work. If to you there has come our letter to the wrong address remove the letter and we promise you that the letter to you will not come any more.

1 0

[U-Boot-Users] [PATCH 0/3] More cfi_flash refactoring
by Haavard Skinnemoen 14 Dec '07

14 Dec '07

The following three patches should be applied on top of the previous cfi_flash cleanup patches. With these in place, I can access the on-board flash on the ATNGW100 using the CFI driver, eliminating the final reason why I haven't submitted the NGW100 board patches for inclusion in mainline. I've tested it by programming a 7MB JFFS2 image into the on-board AT49BV642D flash. It went almost successfully -- I got two erase timeouts and one programming timeout. On the second try, it worked with no problems. It looks like I have a bug in my timing code, since "sleep 10" terminates early from time to time as well. So I feel pretty confident that the CFI driver is doing its job properly -- the timeouts are simply triggered too early every now and then. The last patch in the series changes behaviour, so it probably needs more extensive testing than the others. But this patch is essential for the AT49BV642D to work -- without it, the geometry reversal fixup is incorrectly triggered, and the erase regions become wrong. I think the new behaviour makes more sense, especially since the code uses the device_id to determine whether or not to apply the fixup; it's IMO wrong to depend on the device_id without also checking the manufacturer_id. Haavard Skinnemoen (3): cfi_flash: Read whole QRY structure in one go cfi_flash: Add cmdset-specific init functions cfi_flash: Add manufacturer-specific fixups drivers/mtd/cfi_flash.c | 377 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------ 1 files changed, 234 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-)

1 4